Posted
by
pudge
on Monday October 14, 2002 @01:49PM
from the huh-huh-she-said-switching dept.

Twirlip of the Mists writes "There's a new page on Microsoft's web site that tells the first-person story of an unnamed 'freelance writer' who made the switch from the Mac to Windows XP. The author of the page -- who never identifies herself, and who could very easily be fictional or a composite sketch -- says 'Windows XP gives me more choices and flexibility.' How, you ask? Why, through Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer, and modern operating-system features like separate accounts for each user and easy access to the Internet, of course. Maybe somebody should email Microsoft and let them know that the Mac has had all of these things for years now ... nah. It'd just embarrass them. Anyway, it's an entertaining read that's good for a laugh."Update: 10/14 21:12 GMT by P: Apparently, Microsoft has taken the page down, but Google has it.

Just another story designed to make you buy Microsoft's worthless junk. Who really cares? Sure, XP is one of the most bloated fully functional systems out there. It comes with all the junk you could want.
Some of us would rather find the good stuff and not have it all come as part of the operating system though.
In that way, XP is a Mac users dream. Everything is built in and proprietary. Wonderful right? HAHAHA

This "person" is obviously an invention of Microsoft marketing... no name. (Apple made a great move to have everyone in their "switch" ads identify themselves at the end. Microsoft didn't even try.)

The added touches of this "person" being 5-foot-3 and her husband six feet, and the "Lexus we rented once," was predicted by Philip K. Dick in his short story
The Mold of Yancy [google.com].
If you've read it, go read the Microsoft ad with an eye toward the similarity. It's creepy.

I think the most interesting point isn't that someone switched, but that this is a MICROSOFT writer that was using a Macintosh for 8 years. They just got her to convert. "*Editor's Note: Now that we've successfully converted our writer to a Windows PC, we will be working on getting her to try a Pocket PC. Stay tuned for more developments!"I think the better story would be "Bill forces last Mac user to switch!"

This strategy has existed for decades and I find it not funny nor worth getting your panties in a bunch about.

I think you're missing the point. It's not the strategy that's amusing, it's the fact that it's such a poor effort. Microsoft doesn't offer one reason to use XP that doesn't also exist in Mac OS X. Microsoft Office? They have that for OS X. Multi-user? Yeah, OS X has that. Etc, etc.

it's like an ad from Iraq's tourism industry trying to lure beach-goers away from Florida:

Sun? We have that. Sand? We have lots of that too!

This is almost as silly as Microsoft hosting the "we have the way out" anti-unix site on freebsd. but i digress...

This "person" is obviously an invention of Microsoft marketing... no name. (Apple made a great move to have everyone in their "switch" ads identify themselves at the end

Is there any verification that the apple switchers aren't just made up names? If they aren't, its scary people would give that kinda stuff out (have you seen some of the websites where people are obsessed over the 'switchers'?).

Honestly, I take them both as fakes. Sure, apple did a better job with it, but the whole deal isn't anything special. Look at any industry, you'll see people market that there product is better than the competition for reasons A and C, but the competition markets that there product is better than the original for reasons B and D. Marketing is a load, and most slashdotters can see through the sludge.

This isn't anything special. Why is everyone up in arms about it? Just a story to insult the MS?

I don't have any formal training in marketing besides having watched maybe 10000 hours of TV:) In many categories the market leader does not mention the competition. For instance, you don't see commercials where MacDonalds even mentions Burger King or their other competitors. Nike and Budweiser do the same thing. Up until now Microsoft has only compared their newest OS to previous versions of Windows.

If I was an Apple user I would be encouraged by this bit of marketing. It implies that Microsoft is concerned about their image compared with Apple and is willing to violate this empirical rule.

Microsoft doesn't offer one reason to use XP that doesn't also exist in Mac OS X. Microsoft Office?

From the botom of the article:

Editor's Note: Now that we've successfully converted our writer to a Windows PC, we will be working on getting her to try a Pocket PC. Stay tuned for more developments!

I'm pretty sure that what's going on here is that Microsoft found a freelance writer to write glowingly about XP in exchange for free hardwaree and OS. Similar to the old tactic of giving aluminum siding to a family for free so the neighbors can see it in action. 10 bucks says she's on the MS payroll. Also, in response to the posters above who remarked that she is so much better looking than the women in the Mac ads: I'll bet the picture shown is not the writer of the article.

I'm the guy who submitted the story, and I'll be happy to answer your question. Apple did something that most people aren't aware of. They actively solicited, on their web site, write-in testimonials about switching from Windows to Mac OS X for almost a year before running the first "Switchers" ad. Also, Apple paid for the Switchers airfare and accommodations when they shot their TV spots, but they themselves received no money at all.

Finally, the TV spots are just a small part of the Switchers campaign. Check out apple.com/switch/stories [apple.com] sometime. You'll find dozens of emailed testimonials from real people identified only by their initials.

The answer to your question is yes. I believe the people featured in Apple's Switchers campaign are real. While I concede that it's possible that the whole thing campaign a big hoax, I think it would have been a lot harder for Apple to fabricate it than it would have been to simply find a couple dozen people who were willing to talk about their Macs on camera. The preponderance of evidence points to the conclusion that Apple is just letting people tell their own stories, while the preponderance of evidence is that Microsoft, in this case, isn't.

Long ago I worked for a company that did a great deal of Microsoft's print & online propaganda. Photodisc material was used very frequently in proofs and final product. More than once an employee from our company posed for a photo to run in some brochure or other direct marketing crap. Stroll through the MS site and you'll see a number of stock photos. The stock images are not usually used in such a blatantly dishonest and misrepresentative manner. That they do not have the photo of the 'real' person who switched tells me that the whole thing is bogus. We'll have to modify Mark Twain to read: "lies, damn lies, statistics, and Microsoft marketing materials."

How did this get modded 'insightful'? Where's your proof that Apple paid anyone to lie, or that they're even lying? Apple solicited write-in testimonials on their website for customers to explain why they switched to Macs. Microsoft put up a story from some unnamed person. Looks like Apple is the more honest company here. So before you go spouting off about people lying, make sure you know what the fuck you're talking about.

This is almost as silly as Microsoft hosting the "we have the way out" anti-unix site on freebsd. but i digress...

I know of a similar page you speak about. They compare linux servers to WindowsNT based OS's and provide bunch of examples which absolutely make no sense.

I have friends who are Microsoft zealots. They code in asp, use windowsXP and dismiss *nix as hobbyist's OS. I've had some pretty heated arguments with them on many different occasions, and they come up with the lamest excuses and examples why Windows based servers and IIS in particular are far more superior to *nix and apache based solutions. One notable point they try to make is that IIS is supported by a multi-billion dollar corporation and can be set up by pointing and clicking, as opposed to modifying.htaccess and getting down and dirty into the apache's configuration files. Truly pathetic.

Don't get me wrong, I use Windows 2000 on 3 of my computers because frankly they get the job done on the desktop level. But when it comes to servers, Windows/IIS is a FisherPrice toy compared to BSD/apache. Believe me, I've tried to like IIS... It never clicked.

actually, a burger king ad did explicitly mention mcdonalds in a commercial back in 1982 starring sarah michelle gellar. mcdonalds was so pissed that they sued not only burger king, but 5 year old sarah as well. now due to truth in advertising laws, she can only enter a mcdonalds in disguise.

The article looks as though it was written by somebody who has never, ever, touched a MAC.

Frankly, I'd like to see a MAC formatted ZIP disk work instantly on a PC. I'd also like to see why the writer didn't compare Microsoft Office to Microsdoft Office v.X. I'll tell you why, v.X is in my opinion the best Office implementation at the moment. Also, why not compare IE 6 PC to IE on the MAC?

Okay, trained actors can sniff out trained actors. All my actor friends, even those that love Macs themselves, know without even a glimmer of a doubt, that most if not all of those "switchers" on the Mac commericials are fellow actors. Voice inflections, presence, all the little nuances that go into actor: they're all there. So, YES, they are actors. Perhaps they are acting out real testimonials, that can be debated, but they are actors.

As the IT support geek for an office of writers, this statement is a complete joke. Writers need a word processor they're not doing anything that requires loads of processing power. In fact, the best freelancers that we work with are using ancient machines (think 68040 or older Macs -- that's pre-PowerPC to the x86 crowd), and the best writer that we work with still sends in copy that has been typed (and the boss thought I was God Almighty when I came onboard and introduced her editorial assistant to a scanner and OCR). And while I'm being an old curmudgeon, how about those folks out there still using those old indestructible Tandy laptops that run on three "C" batteries? All writers need is a something that lets them bang keys. Case in point -- I just retired a PowerBook 150 with 4 MB of RAM, a 40 MB hard drive, and a grayscale screen and it ran WordPerfect 3.5 for Mac like a champ, which was all we needed it for. End of story.

The open-source nature of Linux means that the company lacks a centralized strategy for keeping pace with emerging technologies and hardware. And that means Linux is typically much slower than Microsoft and Microsoft partners to consistently deliver the tools needed to stay current with new hardware requirements and new technologies.

I wondered in high school whether bullshitting could be a full time job. Perhaps I should work for Microsoft. Oh, just for fun type Unix or linux into Microsofts search engine to see what it comes up with.

I cant imagine anyone here would be switching now considering how popular OSX is around here. BUT, in the past, have any of you ever switched from Mac to Windows? I personally have not. I can see situations where it would be much much better to use Windows. One case would be 3d animation. Most of the good software traditionally has run on windows and Irix. Please do not bring up Maya OSX, that is the exception, not the rule. Windows can run on many different hardware configs that are far more afordable. Has this been enough for anyone here to switch in the past?

Judging from the picture [microsoft.com] I'd say it took half a day and a team of 6 people to get that shot.

As a media professional, I find the composition amusing. It is a down-angle, making the subject look more downtrodden and small. The half grin could almost be seen as a grimace. Even the way she holds the cup -- as if she was handcuffed with it -- seems to suggest more of a prisoner than someone empowered.

What are the odds that they went to a Mac-using ad agency to get this done, and this is secret code to the smart people?

The thing is that Apple users have heard all the anti-Apple flack for years and know where their loyalties lie. The average Windows user doesn't know that anything else exists.

Hear, hear. They can have some pretty absolute opinions about other OS's though, without ever having used them, or even seen them.

I've been a pretty avid alternativist for the last two decades. I used to be (still am in some ways) an Amiga nut. I dived into BeOS when it was new. I was an early adopter of Linux, and have had one or two BSD machines.

My father (without actually bothering to look at any of the machines for 10s) would always say "Give it up! There is no alternative! Windows has won! No-one will ever use anything else!"

Well, the last time Pops came over, I showed him my new flat-panel iMac. I just did some basic demoing, like showing him the zooming dock at the bottom, window shadows, speach recognition, and of course the fish in the background [serenescreen.com] (yes, any OpenGL screen saver can be run as a desktop background).

Response? We'll, he looked a bit shocked. Then he looked a bit flabbergasted. The he looked stunned for a while. Then he said "I want that in my computer".

At which point I explained "You can't have that in your computer. It's nigh impossible in Windows. But if you got a Mac..."

"At which point I explained "You can't have that in your computer. It's nigh impossible in Windows. But if you got a Mac...""

I know what you mean. Although I am a PC boy myself, I have used my friends' Macintosh products and test driven some in stores. My next machine will likely be a notebook and a powerbook [apple.com] is definitely high on the list of possibilities.

The displays are so nice. And I want i(Tunes|Photo|Movie|Pod without the hassle). I want the space age ergonomics. Very few PC notebooks have keyboards as nice as the powerbook ones. (The toshiba tecra comes to mind.)

And to think, Microsoft has gone proactively anti-apple and here I am reciting why I want a mac because of it.

This is probably redundant because I didn't wade through 500+ responses, BUT:

I got the strangest feeling I was reading a Knowledge Base article when I looked at this page. The fact that "she" went into how to setup your ISP information step by step instead of saying, "... and setting up my email was as simple as falling down a flight of stairs..." decided it for me that this was a hoax.

I've read about M$ doing some sketchy stuff before, but this takes the taco.

While those are indeed reasons to switch, they aren't quite compelling.

Freedom from DRM.So far, there is no DRM in Mac OS, and untill there is, that isn't a reason to switch.

Freedom to use the OS however you want to. I want to use my OS to get my daily work done. There isn't much beyond that that the OS has to do. This isn't really a clear argument, can you be more specific?

Freedom to tweak and change, even at code-level.I rarely have the desire to do this. Most programs work perfectly fine for me, and for those that dont, I get an alternative program. Even still, this argument is only compelling for a minority of computer users, I believe the original poster's intent was compelling reasons for other people to switch.

Freedom to install the OS on any machine you want to without asking "Mother May I?"Not quite. I can install it on any machine I want to, assuming that the machine is compatable with the OS hardware support. The main issue of course being that there are still seperate distros of Linux (PPC, x86, SPARC). When will we see a distro with all the nessesary code in one package, and a universal install?

Freedom from bullshit licenses and other nightmares.I'll give you that one. But again, the argument could still be made that for most intents and purposes, Apple provides the same freedom to it's users.

Freedom from the vast majority of viruses and exploits.Seems to me that that's a better argument to switch to mac than to linux.

Like I said, they're all very good reasons, but none of them are compelling to most users.

Yes I have. Well 4 years ago. I got tired of how slow the mac would web browse (among other things) and that if I wanted to play any computer games at all I either had to wait 1-2 years and hope it came out on the mac or just not play it at all. Also the price of hardware is horrible. I built my own to of the line PC for $1200 (it was 4 years ago). I could go cheaper these days. I'd love to have a G4 Powerbook, but no way at those prices considering I can get a P4 laptop from dell for about $1600.

I still use my old wallstreet powerbook for just internet usage in my living room and an old power computing clone for my linux server (for web and ftp use).

I would love to run OSX on a G4 titanium powerbook, but until I can buy a souped up one for around $1600 or less I won't ever buy another Mac.

actually, my favorite part after her crowing about purchasing a laptop for $450 less, is that she then had to turn around and purchas winXP pro in order to have her laptop work properly with energy saving features.

lol.

yeah, we'll sell you this laptop for cheap, but battery life is gonna cost ya!

Gee, I wonder if Caroline Woodham, the model in the picture, knows she switched to XP or that she is now a Microsoft editor.

Whether she does or not, it looks like Microsoft just pulled the page (or it got slashdotted). It seems they can no longer find it.

I guess Caroline Woodham (or her make believe twin) just got "fired". Or maybe her PC self destructed. Anyway, it has got to be one of the shortest Microsoft careers ever.

I feel sorry for the model in the picture, though. She signed a release that people could use the photo in general artwork, not that someone can make up stories about her personally. The price of a 72 dpi picture (assuming someone didn't just take it off their web site and cut off the top part with the light table and the company name) just doesn't cover something like that.

As for a company that feels it needs to hire fictional clip art switchers/editors, that's pretty sad. At least Apple uses (and hopefully pays) real people.

My favorite switchers tale is still the 1993 "Godzilla vs. MechaGodzilla II". Man, when he switches, he switches big time. Just look at all them Macs.;)

You might want to read the article. It doesn't seem likely that it's a real story in any sense of the word ("real" or "story"). Massive chunks of it were obviously written by professional marketers, and much of the last few paragraphs appear to be the work of MS support personnel.

Advertisements may be obvious, but they can still have a kind of life to them. Judging from the responses (both positive and negative), the Apple "Switch" campaign seems to be pretty lively.

Even a cursory reading of the MS article shows that while they've downplayed the obviousness of the advertisement (and not very well, after all), they've also failed to imbue it with any sort of liveliness. It reads like a second-rate brochure for life insurance policies.

I don't think that my "higher ups" at Microsoft would look too kindly on the fact that I bash MS's security regularly, spend a significant amount of time in Linux, and generally think of MCSE as meaning Micky-mouse Certified Suckers, Etc. (Note I'm saying "generally", as in the majority, not as in all.)

My "kind views" of MS are only when I compare them to Apple.

Apple's selling the Mac-buying public a bridge, and virtual one at that. MS's claims, while quite often faulty and fabricated, at least have a bit more truth than the company that is trying to sell OS X as a finished product. I love the concept of OS X, but it is NOT a finished product. Apple is selling slower hardware at higher prices, running a version 1 operating system. Microsoft is selling an established OS that has more options than you can shake a stick at. Do I love them? No. But their sales literature doesn't smell quite as much like a red herring.

I guess they had to do something to keep it from crashing during the filming of the ad.

Well, one does wonder... the advertiser may have been worried about whether the thing actually died in the saddle or not, but the original Microsoft page that this SlashDot story is about says (used to say):

Later, I had to uninstall and reinstall Outlook

...which to me looks like she'd probably have to uninstall XP to stop it from crashing.

So... if this is Microsoft's new, fantastic, reliable, easy-to-use replacement for OS/X, why did our anonymous but very pretty switcher have to spend time sysadminning her brand new toy? And why did Microsoft publish that point? They're basically confirming every Windows user's constant nightmare: that the system might suddenly and without obvious cause irretrievably screw itself.

When was the last time you had to remove and reinstall KMail to get it working?

At the bottom of the MS page is a link to submit your own story about how MS software has made your life complete. I'm going to send the story about Windows XP activation puking last week while I was writing my last paper for college graduation. I'd love to let MS know how I stayed up all night trying to reactivate, then installing Windows 2000, and reinstalling Windows XP (only to find out that hey, I can reactivate now that I've reinstalled).

And before any of your even think about saying "That's what you get for pirating," I'll have you know this was a legal copy. I didn't pay full retail for it, but that's the benefit of going to a school owned by Microsoft. XP is worth the $10 I paid for it, but not much more.

The thing is -- I've never had to add or remove my e-mail client, either.

I think that was a joke or something, though I haven't seen it.

Outlook does kind of blow for some things, but for sucking so bad it still doesn't really give me any problems, unless you count it being totally fucking worthless for newsgroups. I don't even bother using it for that.

Incidently, I still have the majority of my e-mail since about 97 on this system. It's been brought forward upgrade after upgrade.

I actually switched from the Macintosh to Windows XP and I will not go back to Mac, I like the way I have a whole lot more Applications than on the Mac and I got tired of being a public beta tester. Mac OS X 10.2 did not fix any of the problems I had with the system, but with Windows it works fine and I dont have blue screens or any freezes. I also find the PC to be much faster than the Mac despite Apples claims.